Calibration of a mechanics-based method for large-scale vulnerability assessment
- 149 Downloads
This paper presents an analytical method for large-scale vulnerability assessment used in order to simulate damage scenarios corresponding to those observed during past earthquakes in Italy. The method, already published in the technical literature with the acronym SP-BELA (Simplified Pushover-Based Earthquake Loss Assessment), has been adopted to calculate the vulnerability of the Italian building stock classified as reinforced concrete and masonry buildings. The current paper describes the calibration of the method through the comparison of numerically calculated damage scenarios and data on observed damage collected during earthquakes occurred in Italy starting from the 1976 Friuli earthquake. The use of observed damage data allowed to validate the method and to add reliability to the calculation of damage scenarios. The damage scenarios are useful to plan the emergency response immediately after an earthquake. Finally, a Web Geographical Interface System tool that implements SP-BELA to calculate seismic risk and real time damage scenario is presented.
KeywordsCapacity curve Survey form Calibration Damage scenario WebGIS platform
The authors would like to express their gratefulness to Dr. Elena Speranza for the constructive discussion that lead to a way to validate SP-BELA method using observed damage data. The support of Dr. Francesco Giordano and Mr Flavio Bocchi in interpreting the observed damage data has to be gratefully acknowledged. Finally, particular mention is due to Dr. Gerard O’Reilly whose comments and observations have considerably improved the quality of this paper.
The current study has been beneficiary of Italian Department of Civil Protection funds. However, this does not necessarily reflect the ideas and official policy of the department.
- Angeletti P, Baratta A, Bernardini A, Cecotti C, Cherubini A, Colozza R, Decanini L, Diotallevi P, Di Pasquale G, Dolce M, Goretti A, Lucantoni A, Martinelli A, Molin D, Orsini G, Papa F, Petrini V, Riuscetti M, Zuccaro G (2002) Valutazione e riduzione della vulnerabilità sismica degli edifici, con particolare riferimento a quelli strategici per la protezione civile. Rapporto finale 2002, Dipartimento della Protezione Civile-Ufficio Servizio Sismico Nazionale, RomaGoogle Scholar
- Benedetti D, Petrini V (1984) Sulla vulnerabilità sismica di edifici in muratura: proposta su un metodo di valutazione. L’industria delle Costruzioni 149:66–74Google Scholar
- Borzi B, Crowley H, Pinho R (2008c) The influence of infill panels on vulnerability curves for RC buildings. In: The 14th world conference on earthquake engineering, Beijing, ChinaGoogle Scholar
- Braga F, Dolce M, Liberatore D (1982) A statistical study on damage buildings and an ensuing review of the M.S.K.—76 scale. In: Proceedings of the 7th European conference on earthquake engineering, Athens, GreeceGoogle Scholar
- Cauzzi C, Faccioli E, Vanini M, Bianchini A (2015) Updated predictive equations for broadband (0.01–10 s) horizontal response spectra and peak ground motions, based on a global dataset of digital acceleration records. Bull Earthq Eng 13(6):1587–1612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-014-9685-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Di Pasquale G, Orsini G, Pugliese A, Romeo RW (1998) Damage scenario from future earthquakes. In: The 11th European conference on Earthquake Engineering, Rotterdam, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
- DISS (2010) Working Group Database of Individual Seismogenic Sources (DISS), Version 3.1.1: A compilation of potential sources for earthquakes larger than M 5.5 in Italy and surrounding areas, INGVGoogle Scholar
- Dolce M, Speranza E, Giordano F, Borzi B, Bocchi F, Conte C, Di Meo A, Faravelli M, Pascale V (2017) Da.D.O—a web-based tool for analyzing and comparing post-earthquake damage database relevant to national seismic events since 1976. In: Proceedings of the 17th ANIDIS conference, Pistoia, ItalyGoogle Scholar
- Grünthal G (1998) European Macroseismic Scale (EMS 1998). Council of Europe, Cahiers du Centre Européen de Géodynamique et de Sismologie, p 15Google Scholar
- Lagomarsino S, Cattari S (2014) Fragility functions of masonry buildings. In: SYNER-G: Typology definition and fragility functions for physical elements at seismic risk. Springer, Dordrecht, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7872-6_5
- Panagiotakos T, Fardis MN (2001) Deformation of R.C. members at yielding and ultimate. ACI Struct J 98:135–148Google Scholar
- Restrepo-Velez LF, Magenes G (2004) Simplified procedure for the seismic risk assessment of unreinforced masonry buildings. In: Proceedings of the 13th world conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, CanadaGoogle Scholar
- Ross TJ (1995) Fuzzy logic with engineering applications. McGrawHill, NewYork ISBN 0 07 0539170 Google Scholar
- Tsionis G and Fardis MN (2014) Seismic fragility curves for reinforced concrete buildings and bridges in Thessaloniki. In: The 2nd European conference on earthquake engineering and seismology, Istanbul, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
- Yucemen MS, Askan A (2003) Estimation of earthquake damage probabilities for reinforced concrete buildings. In: Wasti ST, Ozcebe G (eds), Seismic assessment and rehabilitation of existing buildings, Springer Netherlands, NATO Science Series 29:149–164Google Scholar